House of Representatives voted on Tuesday to remove all $100 million in

FRIDAY FAX

July 18, 2003
Volume 6, Number 30

US House eliminates $100 million earmarked for UN Population Fund

In a stinging defeat for the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), the US
House of Representatives voted on Tuesday to remove all $100 million in
proposed funding for UNFPA from the US foreign aid bill, despite a massive
lobbying campaign carried out on Capitol Hill by UNFPA's American allies.

The House vote was extremely close, 216-211, but still appears to
show a significant shift in opinion regarding the legitimacy of UNFPA. The
last full House vote on UNFPA was in 1999, during which UNFPA received a
majority of support, 221 to 198.

According to Representative Christopher Smith (R-NJ), a co-sponsor
of the amendment to remove the UNFPA funding, continuing revelations of
UNFPA's involvement in coercive population control programs, especially in
China, have undermined US political support for the agency. Speaking
during debate this week, Smith asserted, "since 1979, the UN Population
Fund (UNFPA) has been the chief apologist for
China's coercive one-child-per-couple policy...the women of China are
being oppressed with great impunity by their government."

Smith continued, "This debate is all about coercion. I would hope
that my friends who support abortion would realize that coercion, whether
it be forced sterilization or forced abortion, is an unconscionable act;
and when it is done with impunity by the Chinese government with their
partner, the UN Population Fund, we need to disassociate ourselves from
that kind of activity....I would hope that we would stand with the women
of China who are being oppressed by their government and with their
partners in these crimes against humanity, the UN Population Fund."

In July, 2002, President Bush decided to withhold $34 million from
UNFPA because of its ties to coercion. In order to render UNFPA eligible
for renewed US funding, the House International Relations Committee in May
attempted to weaken a long-standing US human rights law, called the
Kemp-Kasten amendment, that forbids US support for coercive population
control programs. 22 Democrats and 1 Republican voted for an amendment
proposed by Joseph Crowley (D-NY) that sought to create a legal
distinction between direct and indirect support for coercion. According to
the Crowley amendment, only "direct" support for coercion would remain
illegal. Since UNFPA does not carry out the coercion in China, itself,
UNFPA should therefore receive the $100 million. This legal maneuvering
did not prove convincing to the full House on Tuesday.

When President Bush announced his 2002 decision against UNFPA, he
was roundly condemned on editorial pages for being "anti-women." However,
UNFPA and its allies have so far remained silent about Tuesday's House
vote. UNFPA has yet to publicly acknowledge the decision, even though it
represents a potentially crippling blow to the agency's finances.

UNFPA's pro-abortion supporters in the House are expected to
maintain their fight to refund the beleaguered agency.

Copyright - C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute). Permission
granted for unlimited use. Credit required.

Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute
866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 427
New York, New York 10017
Phone: (212) 754-5948 Fax: (212) 754-9291
E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.c-fam.org